While China is attempting to achieve “most favored nation” status with the US, it has refused Washington’s pressure to improve its human rights record, saying that China and the US have different social systems and ideologies and that they should not interfere in each other’s internal affairs. China stresses “two systems for two different countries and peaceful coexistence.”
If former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) had been more broad-minded and farsighted by emphasizing the differences between Taiwan and China and respecting the actual situation, then the ideal of “two systems for two different countries” would have resulted in peaceful relations between Taiwan and China while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was in power.
The dispute over Taiwan stems from China being unable to accept the differences in political, social and ideological systems between Taiwan and China and the tyrannical way in which Beijing wants to make Taiwan part of China. In Chinese, “one” (yi, 一) and “difference” (yi, 異) share the same pronunciation, but have different tones. This slight difference in tone is an unlimited source of trouble.
Unless China faces facts and gives up its insistence on things being “one” and instead accepts “difference,” Taiwan will have no choice but to go off in search of the common strategic interests it shares with other counties around the world. This is the only way Taiwan can resist China’s insistence on things being “one” to uphold the “differences” that actually exist.
DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has proposed the idea of “seeking harmony, but reserving the right to disagree” and “seeking agreement in a spirit of conciliation.” This takes things out of the framework fixed on “one” and highlights the differences in the values, system and identity between Taiwan and China in order to make the search for “peaceful and stable relations” a common interest and responsibility shared by Taiwan and China. This is something the vast majority of Taiwanese can agree is the lowest common denominator of “two systems for two different countries and peaceful coexistence.”
The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) reaction to Tsai’s proposal highlights the similarities between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). These two evil twins are in bed together, both clinging to the shaky so-called “1992 consensus” in an attempt to turn Taiwan into a part of China. The way this supposedly makes Taiwan a part of China’s internal affairs has been the subject of strong protest and debate.
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government has even gone as far as pulling out Taiwan’s garbage Constitution to put pressure on Tsai. That Constitution is a strong symbol of how the KMT raped the people of Taiwan. That Constitution, which splits “China” into two areas, was drawn up by the KMT long before Taiwan’s democratization and is out of touch with the current situation.
While the DPP government was unable to overhaul the Constitution or formulate a new one, their insistence on upholding the “differences” that exist between Taiwan and China and the concepts of independence and autonomy were well respected by the international community.
However, the way the Ma government follows China’s idea of the “one China” principle allows members of the international community to say that the People’s Republic of China is the only side they will deal with.
A constitution is a fundamental piece of legislation that represents the will of a people while also regulating governmental organization and the rights and interests of a population. The “constitution” that Ma supposedly obeys is one that is based on contradictions and distortions and will lead to the end of Taiwan.
James Wang is a commentator based in Taipei.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS